Referendum 2023

[Mistymuzzle]

They’ll be very very busy.

I think its almost literally impossible to work. At best things are going to grind to a slow pace.

The example the Professor gave in the video, in an emergency, god forbid a war, and the Govt decides/needs to build a runway in the NT adn the defence committee (part of the executive) doesnt consult with the Voice, its off to the high Court.

 

[earl]

It’s becoming clear why there was no detail earlier. Seems they’ve moved from having no power, being only an advisory voice, to having access to the executive government.

That is exactly what representation is. Access does not mean decision making. It means communicating too.

I also had access to my local parliamentarian when she walked to my front door and wanted my vote.

The reason there is no detail is that it's stupid to provide these details now. It's meaningless planning for no benefit but it costs money.

If it gets up I bet it'll be easily implemented as well or better put not my problem.

It won't get up though so don't fret. For the yes voters like me don't worry either because it'll happen anyway. It just won't be through a referendum.

 

[Tucker]

I think its almost literally impossible to work. At best things are going to grind to a slow pace.

Yeah I know. I’ve been banging on about this all thread.
As per the mandate;

The Voice will be empowering, community-led, inclusive, respectful and culturally informed​

• Members of the Voice would be expected to connect with – and reflect the wishes of – their communities.
• The Voice would consult with grassroots communities and regional entities to ensure its representations are informed by their experience, including the experience of those who have been historically excluded from participation.

It’s going to be a monumentally hard job to get around all this with just 24 members:

 

[Tucker]

These yarns will be conducted with elders who don’t speak English by the way…
Remember, there are over 250 languages and 800 dialects in the Australian Aboriginal world.

 

[Mistymuzzle]

That is exactly what representation is. Access does not mean decision making. It means communicating too.

Representation in the context that you are talking about would be access to Parliament, not the executive.

I also had access to my local parliamentarian when she walked to my front door and wanted my vote.

So you have half the access to parliament that an indigenous person gets. If your local member is in opposition (Liberal now) you have zero access to the executive branch of government, but an indigenous person does. I dont expect you to have a problem with this.

 

[balmain boy]

It's treating people differently because of their race. It's called apartheid.

Do you actually believe that?
Seriously?

Trying to undo centuries of white mistreatment towards indigenous Australians by actually giving them a direct say in matters that impact them? Treating a minority that has been marginalised with respect isn't apartheid, it's equality and respect.

Do you realise indigenous Australians have a life expectancy more than a decade lower than non indigenous people? Much more likely to go to jail the list of issues if extensively.

 

[balmain boy]

I'm not interested in debating but I will say that I either mildly of strongly disagree with every one of your points. It's very easy to dismiss points with an airy wave of the hand. I have seen my thoughts dismissed this way many times and, in the last half century, I've found that those who airily dismiss fair claims always turn out to be underestimating the problems. Airbrushing.

I also note that the one point you did not address that the Voice is purely a political tool to control the Liberal Party. I don't like the Libs but they'd be fools to allow Albo to dictate as aspect if policy forever.

The fault for this mess is entirely Albo's. He knew that referendum needed bipartisan support yet he devised a system guaranteed not to achieve bipartisanship. Millions down the drain already, and it hasn't even started.

You're delusional. Labor has nothing to do with the voice. Indigenous Australians requested it, Albo is letting the public decide it. Once it gets established it won't be run by Labor. Labor will have zero control over it.

I hope you realise that a large section of Liberal MPs are in support of the voice, especially in metro areas. The national party aren't, which is no surprise and they would never support indigenous Australians, neither will the far right. I haven't seen a national poll but I know in Sydney nearly every Liberal MP supports the voice. Bi-partisan support exists because the MPs realise it's time for recognition, for empowerment and for real consultation to create solutions that are still yet to come to fruition

 

[balmain boy]

If the NO vote succeeds, we'll be labelled a racist nation, if the YES vote succeeds and the opinions of the committee are ignored the whole of government will be labelled racist. It's a no win situation.

That's absolutely ridiculous.

If a future government ignores the feedback from the voice I'm not sure they'd be called racist, perhaps incompetent. If you're going to spend billions of dollars to help people, and what you've been doing have been working, and the people you trying to help give you feedback and you reject all of it then yes you're incompetent. Sure some recommendations may be unfeasible, cost effective or take a long time to implement. But that consultation could still at least lead to compromise and better solutions, that save money and lives.

 

[balmain boy]

Also in case anyone is curious the City of Sydney council has been operating with a local voice for about a decade, and this has helped improve the decision making and planning for the council.
Of course a much smaller scale but consultation has led to better outcomes for all stakeholders, it hasn't meant that non indigenous Sydneysiders have been marginalised, forgotten or ignored.

 

[Tucker]

Also in case anyone is curious the City of Sydney council has been operating with a local voice for about a decade, and this has helped improve the decision making and planning for the council.
Of course a much smaller scale but consultation has led to better outcomes for all stakeholders, it hasn't meant that non indigenous Sydneysiders have been marginalised, forgotten or ignored.

Comparing Sydney based indigenous and non indigenous to remote communities makes no sense at all.

 

[Tiger-ferret]

Also in case anyone is curious the City of Sydney council has been operating with a local voice for about a decade, and this has helped improve the decision making and planning for the council.
Of course a much smaller scale but consultation has led to better outcomes for all stakeholders, it hasn't meant that non indigenous Sydneysiders have been marginalised, forgotten or ignored.

An example of why a national voice is not warrranted. Direct consultation happens already.

 

[Siberian Kitten]

You're delusional. Labor has nothing to do with the voice. Indigenous Australians requested it, Albo is letting the public decide it. Once it gets established it won't be run by Labor. Labor will have zero control over it.

I hope you realise that a large section of Liberal MPs are in support of the voice, especially in metro areas. The national party aren't, which is no surprise and they would never support indigenous Australians, neither will the far right. I haven't seen a national poll but I know in Sydney nearly every Liberal MP supports the voice. Bi-partisan support exists because the MPs realise it's time for recognition, for empowerment and for real consultation to create solutions that are still yet to come to fruition

Okay, you did not understand my post and now you are lashing out in a style typical of today's excuse for public "debate". I appreciate that, in lieu of cogent argument, you rely on ad hominem attacks. This is also typical.

Am I really delusional? What's delusional is thinking that a referendum can be won without bipartisan support. There is no bipartisan support.

Unlike you, I'm not on a team. I don't care what Libs or Labors want, I am just noticing what they want. I'm talking about the logic of the situation. The govt could create The Voice tomorrow. But the concern is that it will be disbanded by Dutton or his replacement. That's it. There's nothing to stop a Voice committee being created right now.

But advocates want it in the Constitution, which will prevent the body being disbanded by a future Liberal Party administration.

 

[twentyforty]

That is exactly what representation is. Access does not mean decision making. It means communicating too.

I also had access to my local parliamentarian when she walked to my front door and wanted my vote.

The reason there is no detail is that it's stupid to provide these details now. It's meaningless planning for no benefit but it costs money.

If it gets up I bet it'll be easily implemented as well or better put not my problem.

It won't get up though so don't fret. For the yes voters like me don't worry either because it'll happen anyway. It just won't be through a referendum.

Having access is not the same as positioning the executive government to have an obligation to consult with the voices.
“easily implemented” huh?
one of the reasons Aboriginals have not been able to organise and develop a government agency is because they aren’t one people. They have waged war against each other for thousands of years. It’s part of the cultural identity. They may have as many as 600 mobs all with a voice. Agencies set up by the government have failed in the past. I think the NIAA has a great chance of having further success if activists adopt a more positive approach.

 

[hank37w]

These yarns will be conducted with elders who don’t speak English by the way…
Remember, there are over 250 languages and 800 dialects in the Australian Aboriginal world.

Oh, and hundreds of radical, city dwelling indigenous rat bags throwing a spanner in the works at every opportunity, many of them whiter than you or me, some with very questionable roots and in it to rort the system, while those in real need suffer.

In all honesty what does this scam fix that should not of already been fixed by the billions of dollars that have already be thrown at it with a much higher per capita spend on indigenous people than on any other group in this country.

How about we just get the thousands of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Island corporations and more than 100 Government Departments that are currently in place to do their jobs and sort it out, after all you would think that they would have more resources to do this than supposed 24 that will represent the voice.

If you think that 24 representatives on the voice are going to fix anything, you are either dreaming or there is an awful lot of detail about this proposal that they just don't want to tell us about, but just vote YES and we'll sort that out later.

 

[earl]

Having access is not the same as positioning the executive government to have an obligation to consult with the voices.
“easily implemented” huh?

I have no idea what you mean here.

It's not your issue to implement. I don't get this argument. It's not your job.

one of the reasons Aboriginals have not been able to organise and develop a government agency is because they aren’t one people. They have waged war against each other for thousands of years. It’s part of the cultural identity. They may have as many as 600 mobs all with a voice. Agencies set up by the government have failed in the past. I think the NIAA has a great chance of having further success if activists adopt a more positive approach.

This is another argument that makes no sense. Do you seriously believe that having a diverse group of stakeholders is not an issue in basically every single reasonable sized project ever implemented. It's a given.

I don't understand what a positive approach means ?

It's like picking on something for the sake of making something up to be wrong. It's not rational. It's emotional.

I'll just explain how I would manage this stuff. There is a limited budget. Where and how should we spend this money. Give us some good ideas. Then you discuss it and agree to it and then you implement. It's sort of standard stuff just the same as ordering Nuclear submarines but it costs heaps less. It's costing less than 1% of your tax dollars.

The over the top drama from the no side is so out of perspective.

 

[earl]

Oh, and hundreds of radical, city dwelling indigenous rat bags throwing a spanner in the works at every opportunity, many of them whiter than you or me, some with very questionable roots and in it to rort the system, while those in real need suffer.

I love it when someone brings up facts that are rational and sane and don't sound at all racist. I'm clearly being sarcastic.

Just as a little dig. I'm not reporting your post and I'm not having a tantrum but certain posters with multiple accounts do exactly this to me when I use a word they don't like.

 

[earl]

In all honesty what does this scam fix that should not of already been fixed by the billions of dollars that have already be thrown at it with a much higher per capita spend on indigenous people than on any other group in this country.

This makes no sense whatsoever. It's less than 1% of spend.

Give us facts not hyperbole.

 

[earl]

If you think that 24 representatives on the voice are going to fix anything, you are either dreaming or there is an awful lot of detail about this proposal that they just don't want to tell us about, but just vote YES and we'll sort that out later.

No one is stating it'll fix anything. You can't fix people's problems. The no voters crying what about me will still be crying what about me because they blame society for their problems rather than creating a good life for themselves.

It's about recognizing Indigenous people in the constitution and giving them more input into the spend that we make. It's one of the key components Indigenous people have requested via the Uluru statement.

Stop making stuff up and start being rational.

 

[Mistymuzzle]

I'll just explain how I would manage this stuff. There is a limited budget. Where and how should we spend this money. Give us some good ideas. Then you discuss it and agree to it and then you implement. It's sort of standard stuff just the same as ordering Nuclear submarines but it costs heaps less. It's costing less than 1% of your tax dollars.

The over the top drama from the no side is so out of perspective.

NFI

 

[Tucker]

Earl continues to have the worst takes in this thread.
I’ve stopped replying to him.
He has absolutely no idea what he is talking about, yet throws his ill considered and uneducated opinions around as if others need to read them.
Wouldn’t be surprised if he is trolling. Deserves to be ignored.